Use actual statistics when nerfing champions not group-think, wrong opinions

KillzInHD·Mar 13, 2017·5 votes·892 views

I'm tired of seeing nerfs to a champion based upon popularity and wrong group-think opinions that have no actual fact to them. The latest example of this was Varus.

Varus pre 7.5 (Silver +) = Win Rate 50.6% - K / D / A - 6.9 / 6.0 / 8.6

Varus post 7.5 (Silver +) = Win Rate 45.8% - K / D / A - 6.5 / 6.6 / 8.5

The win rate is clear indicator that the only special thing about Varus (his poke damage) has been really hurt by this but it's ok they want him to get close and land AA even though he has no mobility and will likely die. He was a bit too popular and people ran their mouths so forget numbers he needed a nerf. Compare him with other adc's statistics, use actual facts and no one can show how he was OP before 7.5 and especially not after 7.5.

15 Comments

Illâoi Evê SiônMar 13, 20173 votes

They're partially reverting some of his nerfs. That just means he was nerfed too hard, not that there was no reason to nerf him.

Nick Da ChipMar 14, 20172 votes

I don't think varus' was ever op in the slightest, but reducing his abilities CD by popping blight was a step in the right direction to make him less obnoxious. Now if only they do the same to his E.

KillzInHDMar 14, 20172 votes

That, I agree, is true and you don't need a statistic to tell you that much if you play LoL a lot. Great observation and comment.

KillzInHDMar 14, 20172 votes

I do think that there has to be changes to make him survive better if they go in a directional change for his gameplay, though. He is simply too immobile and squishy to get close enough to try and get procs on his Blight if he has no peel which is very common in solo q. And a 45% win rate is alarmingly bad.

DynikusMar 13, 20171 votes

no one can show how he was OP before 7.5

Well that's simply not true. He just got hit a bit harder than he should have.

KillzInHDMar 13, 20171 votes

Show the proof that he was Op then. If he was then surely you can show real proof to it.

Nick Da ChipMar 14, 20172 votes

Wether it be OP or not it certainly was obnoxious to most to play against it every game. that's the date of all flavor of the mo the champs though. If it wasnt a 100% Nerf it certainly would have been a good change.

KillzInHDMar 14, 20172 votes

I really respect your comments and fully agree on what you said.

Chibi BronzlifeMar 13, 20171 votes

Varus was too OP, his Q's were doing way too much damage without even needing stacks to proc. Varus whole playstyle wasn't working as intended. He is supposed to get stacks on the enemy and pop those stacks with a well aimed Q to do damage not just hit an unstacked Q and do over half an enemy's health.

KillzInHDMar 13, 20171 votes

Chibi I'm asking for actual statistics or proof that he was OP. I could make statements with regards to any carry champion about the damage they could do while skipping actually showing anything concrete. I've issued a direct challenge to any who would argue on this and yet while many disagree I have yet to see actual proof the way that I have.

Chibi BronzlifeMar 14, 20171 votes

there is no need to prove it as you could just go watch how he was played in LCS before the nerf to prove it. Q was supposed to burst after procing the W stacks on the enemy, it shouldn't have been doing over half a champion's health with 0 stacks. All you are doing with this thread is complaining about your champion being nerfed by detracting from his actual problem by way of telling people to prove something that's difficult to prove to someone who doesn't want to listen in the first place. You're post blatantly reads as someone who isn't actually looking for proof, but is someone whose mind is set in their opinion already. No matter what anyone says about Varus, if it disagrees with your post you're going to say "but you have no proof"

Let's talk about your stats though, the only thing that changed a nominal amount was win loss rate. On average people had about the same kill/death/assist ratio so saying that the nerf severely hurt Varus who "didn't need it" is baseless in and of itself. If people are averaging the same stats and losing more, then there are multiple reasons why that could happen, but the nerf itself likely isn't that reason. It could be team comps, something else getting boosted to op level, etc. etc. So back to my first point you set your opinion a certain way and "challenged people to prove otherwise" when you weren't going to consider their input at all, and your use of stats is proof enough of this.

KillzInHDMar 15, 20171 votes

You sound very upset but I really don't care. You have used an example of professional players using Varus as your justification of him needing a nerf. Which is ridiculous. If he was doing so much damage with such an easy to hit Q then that should've been blatantly obvious in his damage numbers pre 7.5 but it wasn't. His statistics haven't changed other then win rate? He has dropped about half a kill, he has died more then half a death more (due to him having to get up closer to land AA) and his total damage has dropped by over 3k damage along with the win rate dropping by 5%. Are you serious when you said the only thing that has dropped is win rate? You realize you have just showed that you can't even be objective about statistics in front of you face? Only win rate has changed? There's no difference at all in 6.9 / 6.0 (which isn't even very good) to 6.5 / 6.6?

I have considered input from everyone with something relevant to say but you come across as a condescending guy who doesn't even care for statistics and find it insulting when someone disagree's with you. The statistics show a champion that is not very strong at all when compared to the rest of the roster and that's an undeniable fact no matter how much nonsense you spew. The facts don't support your idiocy no matter how hard you try.

" You're post blatantly reads as someone who isn't actually looking for proof, but is someone whose mind is set in their opinion already. No matter what anyone says about Varus, if it disagrees with your post you're going to say "but you have no proof"

So why the are you in this thread replying to me then? And you still have shown absolutely nothing in regards to evidence to support anything you have said. Unless you consider your suggestion of watching the lcs as evidence. Lmao!!!!!!!!

Chibi BronzlifeMar 15, 20171 votes

The thing is even I was doing that much damage, and I'm no where near pro level. Hell, I'm not even an ADC. Suggesting you view the LCS games was just easier as I can't be bothered to try and find it average player level.

On to your so called statistics, when nerfing damage his damage should drop, and also you said nothing about damage in your initial post about statistics so pulling that out of thin air now is pointless. dropping .4 of a kill in all players playing Varus is not a nominal amount to really say much of anything about. increasing by .6 deaths is in the same boat. Sure winrate dropped 5% but none of the other stats are reflecting major change to contribute to that, the only stat that can even be considered applicable you never even gave, funny thing that. When a champion is nerfed winrate is guranteed to drop unless the nerf failed to the point that the champion lost no power. So what you are complaining about was the intended outcome of nerfing varus. Sure maybe they took the nerf a little too far but overall he needed a nerf.

Varus has never been a "weak" champion nobody played him because he used to be very skill dependent requiring more than just Q to kill people. He also has the weakness of low mobility and before Lethality ADCs were big high mobility ADCs were the picks just because a champion isn't in the meta doesn't mean they are weak. Ahri is a strong champion, and she hasn't been in the meta until Leblanc got nerfed.

I replied in thread because I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you were trying to have a sincere conversation, unfortunately for me you weren't.

Mecha MaIphiteMar 13, 20171 votes

It's so easy to cherry pick stats though, or to make a stat seem like what it isn't. Facts are meant to support arguments; if you provide a stat with no analysis, it's useless.

KillzInHDMar 13, 20171 votes

"It's so easy to cherry pick stats though, or to make a stat seem like what it isn't."

Please elaborate. I would love to know how I cherry picked any stat. It is what it is. Furthermore how did I make a stat seem like what it isn't?

"Facts are meant to support arguments; if you provide a stat with no analysis, it's useless."

You have used no facts to support anything yet criticize the ones I did. You didn't even define what you mean clearly.